DOCSLIB.ORG

Introduction Welcome to Roundheads at the Tower. This Audio Guide Will

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Introduction Welcome to Roundheads at the Tower. This Audio Guide Will Introduction Welcome to Roundheads at the Tower. This audio guide will take you on a walk through one of the secret histories of the Tower of London. ***Feel free at any point to pause the guide and enjoy the other attractions the Tower has to offer, it will be clear where you should be, to begin the next track when you are ready to move on.*** In the early 1640s London was in turmoil, King Charles I was at great odds with his Parliament over matters of both religion and money. The King's favourites, his favoured courtiers and personal friends, were viewed with great suspicion for the influence they had over the monarch. And the city itself was fractious, the London Mob turning out in response to the smallest slight. With factions forming, the parliamentarian roundheads and royalist cavaliers began facing off in the halls of power as well as on the streets of the city. Where did the Tower of London sit in the story of these troubled times? And how, when the conflict came to a head in 1642 starting the First English Civil War, did the Royal Palace and Fortress of the Tower of London, end up in Parliamentarian hands? 1. Lord Strafford’s confinement, or the beginning of the Tower’s troubles ***Our tour begins by Tower Wharf, on the North side of the River Thames by the Middle Draw Bridge. Once there, start the track Lord Strafford’s confinement, or the beginning of the Tower’s troubles, and, keeping the Tower to your right, move at your own pace towards the entrance to the Tower on Tower Hill*** In 1632 the great architect Inigo Jones, Surveyor-General of the King’s Works, began directing a much needed refurbishment of the Tower. Many of his changes were vanity projects, Jones cleared and redesigned the docks by the Tower, constructing a new Wharf, and began replacing the stonework of the White Tower with the expensive Portland stone we see today. Working on the recommendations made by Sir Allen Apsley 10 years earlier, Jones did undertake some more practical projects. He repaired the and replaced the walkways which ran around the outer wall of the Tower, replaced the lead and the cannon on the roof of the White tower and refurbished the interiors of several Towers in the inner ward, something particularly demanded by the King after he had had the misfortune of nearly falling through one of their rotting upper floors in the middle of a ceremony. Jones also enlarged the gunpowder stores for the Office of the Ordnance though curiously despite years of complaints, he did not follow through on the proposal to move the Jewel Houses from their then home, in temporary sheds right next to those same gunpowder stores. By 1640 the tower was ready for the final stage of its make-over, the arming and manning its new defences. As the king was ordering the final troops to be trained, cannon installed and defences placed, Thomas Wentworth the Earl of Stafford, and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland arrived in London. A controversial figure in Parliament and a staunch supporter of the king Parliament saw Strafford’s arrival at this moment as suspicious. He had suggested before that Charles use the Tower to bring them to heel. And now with rumours flying of his misconduct in the Scottish Wars and a plan to bring across Catholic, Irish troops to put down the quarrelous parliament they were to say the least, discomforted, the timing of his arrival. On the 25th of November 1640 Charles I visited the Tower of London. In the company of the Parliamentarian James Hamilton, Earl of Cambridge, he had come to examine the completed works and view his new troops training. That same day, in the king’s absence, the Earl of Strafford was impeached by Parliament. Seized by parliamentary guards, he was imprisoned in the very castle he was accused of trying to turn against them, the Tower of London. 2. Captain Billingsley’s Round, or the First Tower Coup *** Head up through the iron gates onto Tower Hill. The Hill has been a traditional site of protest for the people of London for centuries. Pause here overlooking the Tower, and begin the track Captain Billingley’s Round. There is seating immediately to your left, and further up tower hill to the right, tickets for the Tower are available at booths to your left*** By May 1641, after a 7 month long trial, the Earl of Strafford’s execution at the hands of Parliament was becoming more and more likely. With concerns running high in the court, several of Charles inner circle presented ideas to the king, to save his favourite’s head. A plot developed to bring Charles’ northern army down to London, and spirit the Earl away to the continent. News of the plot in the north quickly leaked, but the plot had a southern component. Sir John Suckling had petitioned the king for permission to raise troops in the service of the king of Portugal and had recruited 100 men to be put under the command of Captain Billingsley. But Sir John had other plans for his regiment. On May 2nd 1641, Charles I ordered the Lieutenant of the Tower William Balfour to allow 100 reinforcements to entry the Tower under the command of Captain Billingsley, but refused to commit the order to paper. Billingsley’s troops were supposed to assemble that day at the White Horse Tavern on Bread Street, near modern day St Paul’s Cathedral, it was hoped that under the cover of the celebrations for the royal wedding of Princess Mary, the mass gathering of soldiers would go unnoticed. With barely half their number arrived by the time they were to depart, and those present already well in their cups, the sorry company marched on the Tower of London with the intention to overthrow its garrison and free the Earl of Strafford. Rumour had spread however, of armed men marching on the Tower, eventually reaching the parliament by late that afternoon. Billingley’s company were stopped at the main gate to the castle by William Balfour, who questioned their right to enter, delaying the invading force long enough for the people of London to step to the Tower’s defence. Hundreds of Londoners turned out to blockade the Tower, by land and by river, buying parliament vital time to send troops to put legitimate reinforcements into the fortress, and to take Billingsley and his men into custody. The Earl of Newport, Constable of the Tower was quickly dispatched to take up residence in the fortress for its protection. The people of London stood vigil over the Tower for several days, until they were assured of its safety. As the focus of the plot, parliament decided that the Earl of Strafford posed too great a danger to be allowed to live, he was homo homini lupus, the man that is a wolf to other men according to the pamphleteers. The Earl was executed, on Tower Hill by Parliamentary authority on 12th of May 1641, just 10 days after the failed plot. 3. Lieutenant Balfour’s Castle, or the peoples’ Tower ***When you are ready, begin the track Lieutenant Balfour's castle, and proceed into the tower, passing under the middle tower and into the inner ward of the fortress and past the Bell Tower.*** The people of London were very discerning about the security of the castle which controlled their city, supported their trade and dominated their river. It is fair to say then that as Lieutenant of the Tower William Balfour was more than popular, he was trusted. As part of the May 1641 plot to take the Tower and free the Earl of Strafford, Balfour had received orders from the king to permit entry to 100 troops raised by Sir John Suckiling to reinforce the fortress, but with suspicion rife and rumours spreading through the city of armed men lurking by the Tower the people of London intervened and Balfour kept the gates locked against the intruders. Following the failure of the Plot Balfour was called to account for himself in Parliament. In his questioning by Parliament Balfour answered plainly that though dubious of the order, true to the King's command he had intended to allow entry to Suckling’s troops. The king was after all the king, but following the public protests he kept the council of the crowd and parliament and barred the door to them. His testimony must have satisfied parliament, for he was shortly returned to the Tower as Lieutenant. And endured in the post for a further 7 months without incident. When in December 1641, Balfour would leave his post. Either at the King's request or due to pressing concerns over his lands in Ireland, he was obliged to have publish a pamphlet explaining his departure to quell the outcry of the city. The Earl of Newport, constable of Tower and Balfour’s superior was once again forced to move into the fortress to reassure London of its safety. 4. Colonel Lunsford’s Ascension, or When the convict ran the prison ***On your right you will see the steps up to the Medieval Palace above Traitors gate, follow the route through the Palace and onto the Inner Curtain wall. To your right you can overlook the river down which parliament’s envoys would have travelled to reach the Tower. Pause here and start the track Colonel Lunsford’s Ascension, or When the convict ran the prison *** Colonel Thomas Lunsford was personally appointed to the role of the Lieutenant of the Tower of London in December 1641, by Charles I, to immediate outcry from the city and parliament.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “Will You Marry Me?” Some First-Hand Accounts of Marriage Proposals, 1600-1900
    \Will You Marry Me?" Some First-hand Accounts of Marriage Proposals, 1600-1900 Edited by Ernest Davis The Gentleman Next Door Declares his Passion for Mrs. Nickleby \Phiz" (Hablot K. Browne), 1839. For my dear brother Joey My teacher and guide in all matters historical i Also by Ernest Davis on the subject of marriage proposals: \How does a 19th century heroine accept a proposal of marriage?" May 2015. \Proposals of Marriage in the Hebrew Bible" February 2019. \Proposals of Marriages in the Plays of Shakespeare" June 2019. ii Laura Ingalls (1867-1957) and Almanzo Wilder (1857-1949). Married 1885. 1 Anna Snitkina (1846-1918) and Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821-1881). Married 1867. 4 Malvina Shanklin (1839-1916) and John Harlan (1833-1911) Married 1856. 9 Rutherford B. Hayes (1822-1893) and Lucy Webb (1831-1889). Married 1851. 13 Robert Browning (1812-1889) and Elizabeth Barrett (1806-1861). Married 1846 18 Julia (1823-1900) and George Foote Married 1841 21 Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882) and Lydia Jackson (1802-1892). Married 1835. 23 Illustration: Edmond Blair Leighton, "Off" 25 Fanny Burney (1752-1840) 26 Proposal from Thomas Barlow (1750/-?) Declined 1775. 27 Proposal from Alexandre d'Arblay (1748-1818). Accepted. Married 1793. 36 Elizabeth Sarah Villa-Real (1757-1807) and William Gooch. Married 1775. 43 James Boswell (1740-1795) and Margaret Montgomerie (1738?-1789). Married 1769. 44 Lady Mary Pierrepont (1689-1762) and Wortley Montagu (1678-1761) Married 1712. 47 William Byrd II (1674-1744) and Lucy Parke (1688-1715). Married 1706. 64 Illustration: Alfred W. Elmore, "The Proposal" 66 Anne Murray Halkett (1622-1699) 67 Proposal from Thomas Howard (1619-1706).
    [Show full text]
  • XXX. Notices of the Tower of London Temp. Elizabeth, and the Morse Armoury Temp
    XXX. Notices of the Tower of London temp. Elizabeth, and the Morse Armoury temp. Charles I. In a Letter addressed byWu. DTJRRANT COOPER, Esq., F.S.A. to Robert Lemon, Esq., F.8.A. Read February 18, 1858. 81, Guilford Street, Russell Square, London, MY DEAR SIR, 15th February, 1858. THE facilities which you have afforded hy the publication of your Kalendar for the puhlic use of the valuable documents preserved in the State-Paper Office, relating to the first half of Queen Elizabeth's reign, and your kindness in per- mitting me to make extracts from your own book of MSS. on ancient armour, consisting of the scattered Exchequer documents, enable me to send to our Society some notices of the Tower of London and of the armouries there and at Green- wich, which are very interesting in themselves, and are chiefly of a date forty years earlier than the lists communicated by William Bray, Esq. P.S.A. to our Society, and reprinted by Meyrick from the Archseologia.a It was only after Elizabeth's public entry into London from Hatfield and the Charter House, on her accession in Nov. 1558, and her return from Westminster to the Tower on 12th January following, preparatory to her procession to West- minster on the 14th, the day before her coronation, that the Tower of London was used as a royal residence in her reign. It was, however, during all her reign the chief arsenal, the principal depdt for the ordnance and armoury, the depository for the jewels and treasures, the site of the Mint, the place where the public records were preserved, and the most important state prison.
    [Show full text]
  • Counterpoint: Henry the King's Cavalier
    COUNTERPOINT Henry, the King’s Cavalier The Lydiard Chronicles: 1603-1664 A Companion Novelette to Written in Their Stars ELIZABETH ST.JOHN Copyright © Elizabeth St.John 2020 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means without the prior permission in writing of the author, nor be otherwise circulated in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. Published by Falcon Historical Press 2020 The Lydiard Chronicles | 1603-1664 The Lady of the Tower By Love Divided Written in Their Stars Novelettes Theo, Earl of Suffolk Barbara, Lady Villiers Henry, the King’s Cavalier "Her world and characters are so real I wanted to remain there. I loved this book, and the Lydiard Chronicles are now on my list of all-time favorite historical novels. A fantastic read." Editor’s Choice, Historical Novel Society Book Review “Ms St. John’s writing is remarkable, with many a brilliant turn-of-phrase, stunning imagery, and delicately vivid depictions of the passion between the (mostly) happily married lords and ladies and their stalwart heroism A dramatic and romantic novel of courage and faith.” Three-time BRAG Medallion Winner " Ms St.John has made history come alive and WOW, what a journey. This is a book that will break your heart, but at the same time, mend it. It is exceptional. When historical fiction is written this way, there is no such thing as too much." 2019 Book of the Year, The Coffee Pot Book Club About COUNTERPOINT: Henry, the King’s Cavalier A counterpoint is a melody played in conjunction with another, or an opposing viewpoint in an argument.
    [Show full text]
  • Biographical Appendix
    Biographical Appendix The following women are mentioned in the text and notes. Abney- Hastings, Flora. 1854–1887. Daughter of 1st Baron Donington and Edith Rawdon- Hastings, Countess of Loudon. Married Henry FitzAlan Howard, 15th Duke of Norfolk, 1877. Acheson, Theodosia. 1882–1977. Daughter of 4th Earl of Gosford and Louisa Montagu (daughter of 7th Duke of Manchester and Luise von Alten). Married Hon. Alexander Cadogan, son of 5th Earl of Cadogan, 1912. Her scrapbook of country house visits is in the British Library, Add. 75295. Alten, Luise von. 1832–1911. Daughter of Karl von Alten. Married William Montagu, 7th Duke of Manchester, 1852. Secondly, married Spencer Cavendish, 8th Duke of Devonshire, 1892. Grandmother of Alexandra, Mary, and Theodosia Acheson. Annesley, Katherine. c. 1700–1736. Daughter of 3rd Earl of Anglesey and Catherine Darnley (illegitimate daughter of James II and Catherine Sedley, Countess of Dorchester). Married William Phipps, 1718. Apsley, Isabella. Daughter of Sir Allen Apsley. Married Sir William Wentworth in the late seventeenth century. Arbuthnot, Caroline. b. c. 1802. Daughter of Rt. Hon. Charles Arbuthnot. Stepdaughter of Harriet Fane. She did not marry. Arbuthnot, Marcia. 1804–1878. Daughter of Rt. Hon. Charles Arbuthnot. Stepdaughter of Harriet Fane. Married William Cholmondeley, 3rd Marquess of Cholmondeley, 1825. Aston, Barbara. 1744–1786. Daughter and co- heir of 5th Lord Faston of Forfar. Married Hon. Henry Clifford, son of 3rd Baron Clifford of Chudleigh, 1762. Bannister, Henrietta. d. 1796. Daughter of John Bannister. She married Rev. Hon. Brownlow North, son of 1st Earl of Guilford, 1771. Bassett, Anne. Daughter of Sir John Bassett and Honor Grenville.
    [Show full text]
  • [Note: This Series of Articles Was Written by Charles Kightly, Illustrated by Anthony Barton and First Published in Military Modelling Magazine
    1 [Note: This series of articles was written by Charles Kightly, illustrated by Anthony Barton and first published in Military Modelling Magazine. The series is reproduced here with the kind permission of Charles Kightly and Anthony Barton. Typographical errors have been corrected and comments on the original articles are shown in bold within square brackets.] Important colour notes for modellers, this month considering Parliamentary infantry, by Charles Kightly and Anthony Barton. During the Civil Wars there were no regimental colours as such, each company of an infantry regiment having its own. A full strength regiment, therefore, might have as many as ten, one each for the colonel's company, lieutenant-colonel's company, major's company, first, second, third captain's company etc. All the standards of the regiment were of the same basic colour, with a system of differencing which followed one of three patterns, as follows. In most cases the colonel's colour was a plain standard in the regimental colour (B1), sometimes with 2 a motto (A1). All the rest, however, had in their top left hand corner a canton with a cross of St. George in red on white; lieutenant-colonels' colours bore this canton and no other device. In the system most commonly followed by both sides (pattern 1) the major's colour had a 'flame' or 'stream blazant' emerging from the bottom right hand corner of the St. George (A3), while the first captain's company bore one device, the second captain's two devices, and so on for as many colours as there were companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Lydiard Tregoze
    Report 4 Report 4 (19th June 1971) LYDIARD TREGOZE by Sir Hugh Casson, M.A., R.A., R.D.I., F.R.I.B.A., F.S.I.A. A talk first broadcast in the B.B.C. Home Service in September 1953, and here reprinted by kind permission of the author and the B.B.C. I first heard the name of Lydiard Tregoze twenty-one years ago. ft was my friend Robert Byron who told me of it, though — to be truthful — it was not of the house but of the nearby church that he spoke with such enthusiasm. Indeed, so enthusiastic was he that he made me promise to visit it forthwith. I did not forget the name Lydiard Tregoze — how could so magical a name once heard ever be forgotten? — but it was in fact ten years later, while on my way from one to another of those aerodromes with which war-time Swindon was ringed, that I saw the name on a signpost and turned off to keep my promise. I left the car at the gate and walked up the long, deserted drive. The house and park were silent, watchful. I peered through the glass of the front door. The beady eye of a stuffed puffin in a glass case stared defiantly back at me. Abashed, I retreated to try my luck with the church. It was locked, but by clambering up I could see into its tiny but fabulous interior. The chancel was packed, literally jam-packed to the roof, with splendid seventeenth-century monuments — gilded and carved and painted and inscribed — looking in the dimness as heraldic and highly coloured as an upset pack of playing cards — and in a way, almost as sinister.
    [Show full text]
  • Family Favouritism and Sibling Rivalry in Early Modern England
    0616011 Family Favouritism and Sibling Rivalry In Early Modern England. University ID number: 0616011. Submitted in part fulfilment for the degree of MA Religious and Social History, 1500-1700, at the University of Warwick. September, 2010. This dissertation may be photocopied. 0616011 Contents Acknowledgments iii Abstract iv Introduction 1 1. The desire for a male heir 11 a) Case-study: an ‘impoverished Lancashire gentleman.’ 11 b) The elites 15 c) The middling ranks 18 2. Defying patriarchy 24 a) Younger sons and favourite daughters 24 b) Age and character 27 c) Obedience and Rebellion 31 d) Education and Intelligence 34 e) Mothers and daughters, fathers and sons 37 f) Alice Greenwood 41 3. Sibling rivalry and affection 43 a) Brotherly bonds 47 b) Sisterly Sentiment 56 c) ‘The alternate sibling relationship’ 63 i 0616011 Conclusion 73 Appendices 79 1) Ballad – ‘The Downfal of Pride’ 79 2) Ballad – ‘Crums of Comfort for the Youngest Sister’ 82 3) Ballad – ‘The Widdow of Watling Street’ (parts 1 and 2) 85 Bibliography 92 ii 0616011 Acknowledgements Firstly I would like to express many thanks to my supervisor, Bernard Capp, who has been an invaluable source of support and constructive criticism. I am also grateful to CN and RW, who offered important outside perspectives, as well as to the helpful staff at the British Library. Finally, a special thanks must go to Valerie Hydon, whose own passion for history and constant encouragement was always an inspiration. iii 0616011 Abstract While the relationship between parent and child in early modern England has been a staple of historical inquiry, alongside detailed debates over the nature of adult treatment towards children, much less attention has been paid to the bonds between siblings.
    [Show full text]
  • Dutch Royal Family
    Dutch Royal Family A Wikipedia Compilation by Michael A. Linton PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 22:31:29 UTC Contents Articles Dutch monarchs family tree 1 Chalon-Arlay 6 Philibert of Chalon 8 Claudia of Chalon 9 Henry III of Nassau-Breda 10 René of Chalon 14 House of Nassau 16 Johann V of Nassau-Vianden-Dietz 34 William I, Count of Nassau-Dillenburg 35 Juliana of Stolberg 37 William the Silent 39 John VI, Count of Nassau-Dillenburg 53 Philip William, Prince of Orange 56 Maurice, Prince of Orange 58 Frederick Henry, Prince of Orange 63 Amalia of Solms-Braunfels 67 Ernest Casimir I, Count of Nassau-Dietz 70 William II, Prince of Orange 73 Mary, Princess Royal and Princess of Orange 77 Charles I of England 80 Countess Albertine Agnes of Nassau 107 William Frederick, Prince of Nassau-Dietz 110 William III of England 114 Mary II of England 133 Henry Casimir II, Prince of Nassau-Dietz 143 John William III, Duke of Saxe-Eisenach 145 John William Friso, Prince of Orange 147 Landgravine Marie Louise of Hesse-Kassel 150 Princess Amalia of Nassau-Dietz 155 Frederick, Hereditary Prince of Baden-Durlach 158 William IV, Prince of Orange 159 Anne, Princess Royal and Princess of Orange 163 George II of Great Britain 167 Princess Carolina of Orange-Nassau 184 Charles Christian, Prince of Nassau-Weilburg 186 William V, Prince of Orange 188 Wilhelmina of Prussia, Princess of Orange 192 Princess Louise of Orange-Nassau 195 William I of the Netherlands
    [Show full text]
  • J8cboes from Tbe )Dast
    J R Army Med Corps: first published as 10.1136/jramc-03-03-20 on 1 September 1904. Downloaded from 298 J8cboes from tbe )Dast. THE ARMY SURGEON, AND THE CARE OF 'l'HE SICK AND WOUNDED DURING THE GREAT CIVIL WAR. , By CAPT. H. A. L. HOWELL. Royal Army Medical Corps. PART 1. THE Civil War brought about several important changes in the medical organisation of our army. During the Elizabethan and early Stuart periods the unit of medical organisations in the field was the Company-each company having its own surgeon and medical equipment. The Civil War witnessed the disappearance of company surgeons and the introduction of the regimental system. Protected by copyright. Each regiment was now to have its surgeon, assisted by one or two junior surgeons known as "Surgeon's Mates." The new system, based on the unit of the regiment, existed in our army for over two centuries, but was soon supplemented by an extra­ regimental medical staff, which had charge of the staff of the Army and of the large general hospitals. There were many reasons for the disappearance of the company system. The provision of a surgeon to each company necessitated a very large number of surgeons. It had always been found difficult to obtain sufficient medical officers for the army, and in order to keep up their numbers, surgeons had, at times, to be obtained by http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/ impressment. The provision of company surgeons had been almost entirely in the hands of the captains of companies, and they, only too often, neglected their duty in this respect, and either supplied no surgeons at all, or enrolled as surgeons men who were not in any way qualified to hold that position.
    [Show full text]
  • THE Navy UNDER CHARLES I 1625-40
    THE NAvY UNDER CHARLES I 1625-40 ANDREW DEREK THRUSH University College Ph.D. Dissertation C ABSTRACT This study is primarily concerned with how the Caroline Navy was run, both in theory and in practice. Previous assessments of early Stuart naval administration have generally been superficial and unsympathetic in tone, but this new work, in shedding fresh light on a variety of themes, attempts to offer a more detailed and balanced view of the quality of administration in the 1620s and 1630s. Starting with an examination of the Navy's senior executive, the thesis broadens out into a discussion of the role of the Navy Board and the manner in which the yards were administered. Here it is argued that the yards were a good deal better regulated than has sometimes been appreciated. It is also suggested that the Navy's ability to reform its own administration has been understated. In the second part of the thesis, two chapters are devoted to the question of finance, in which both financial procedures and management are discussed. In the final section, the Navy's ability to man, victual and prepare its ships for sea is scrutinised. Detailed consideration is also given to the Ordnance Office, which was responsible for gunning and munitioning the Navy's ships. In these later chapters considerable space is devoted to administrative deficiencies which persistently dogged the Navy, but the author argues that institutional factors, such as underfunding, were often to blame rather than mismanagement, a theme which is echoed in the final conclusion. -2- PREFACE In the process of writing this thesis I have incurred many debts of gratitude.
    [Show full text]
  • Queen Anne's Maids of Honour
    'THE HONOURABLE SISTERHOOD': QUEEN ANNE'S MAIDS OF HONOUR FRANCES HARRIS WHEN Sir Charles Sedley asked a new arrival among the maids of honour at the Restoration court whether she intended to set up as 'a Beauty, a Miss [mistress], a Wit or a Politician', he was acknowledging, in his unregenerate way, that these posts could oflfer considerable scope for a woman. The more famous among those who took advantage of this, including Sedley's own daughter ('none of the most virtuous but a wit'), have figured prominently in studies of court beauties and royal mistresses.^ But the experience of the majority of obscurer women, for whom the court was a social centre, a means of access to public life, a marriage market, or a source of livelihood, can be equally and more generally illuminating. Such experience is not always easy to recover. For some of the women, even basic details such as their identity and duration of office can be difficult to establish. Often their stories can only be pieced together from scattered fragments of genealogical data and court gossip. But occasionally enough documentation survives to provide a more complete picture. Among the papers of Sir William Trumbull is a small group of family correspondence concerning an attempt to obtain an appointment as maid of honour for his niece Jane Cottrell towards the end of Queen Anne's reign. Although the attempt was in the end unsuccessful, taken together with other evidence it provides an unusually detailed insight into the expectations and financial calculations which led families to seek these posts for their daughters, and into the patronage networks, including the role of the Queen herself, which operated to secure them.
    [Show full text]
  • Arts Et Savoirs, 6 | 2016 Self-Portrait of a Lady As an Absent Latinist 2
    Arts et Savoirs 6 | 2016 Women’s portraits of the self Self-Portrait of a Lady as an Absent Latinist Lucy Hutchinson and the Recording of Encounter and Loss Autoportrait de femme en latiniste absente : Lucy Hutchinson ou le récit de la rencontre et de la perte Michael A. Soubbotnik Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/aes/741 DOI: 10.4000/aes.741 ISSN: 2258-093X Publisher Laboratoire LISAA Electronic reference Michael A. Soubbotnik, « Self-Portrait of a Lady as an Absent Latinist », Arts et Savoirs [Online], 6 | 2016, Online since 06 July 2016, connection on 02 May 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/ aes/741 ; DOI : 10.4000/aes.741 This text was automatically generated on 2 May 2019. Centre de recherche LISAA (Littératures SAvoirs et Arts) Self-Portrait of a Lady as an Absent Latinist 1 Self-Portrait of a Lady as an Absent Latinist Lucy Hutchinson and the Recording of Encounter and Loss Autoportrait de femme en latiniste absente : Lucy Hutchinson ou le récit de la rencontre et de la perte Michael A. Soubbotnik An Encounter in absentia 1 Lucy Hutchinson was born on January 29th 1620 the daughter of Sir Allen Apsley, Lieutenant of the Tower of London and his third wife Lucy, daughter of Sir John St John. The land was then at peace (it being towards the latter end of the reign of King James), if that quietness may be called a peace which was rather like the calm and smooth surface of the sea whose dark womb is already impregnated with a horrid tempest.1 2 Her family belonged to this English puritan-leaning gentry whose economic power and (cautious) political activism in the Commons had been steadily growing since the transference to the Crown of the taxes payable to Rome in 1536 and the ensuing dissolution of monasteries which, as Lucy notes, “left” the members of her own kind, in whom she saw the bearers of the “interests of the people”, “only to expect an opportunity to resume their power into their own hands”2.
    [Show full text]